Fuel cell technology shows great promise as an alternative energy source for numerous applications. Several types of fuel cells have been constructed, including: polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells, direct methanol fuel cells, alkaline fuel cells, phosphoric acid fuel cells, molten carbonate fuel cells, and solid oxide fuel cells. For a comparison of several fuel cell technologies, see Los Alamos National Laboratory monograph LA-UR-99-3231 entitled Fuel Cells: Green Power by Sharon Thomas and Marcia Zalbowitz.
Although all fuel cells operate under similar principles, the physical components, chemistries, and operating temperatures of the cells vary greatly. For example, operating temperatures can vary from room temperature to about 1000° C. In mobile applications (for example, vehicular and/or portable microelectronic power sources), a fast-starting, low weight, and low cost fuel cell capable of high power density is required. To date, polymer electrolyte fuel cells (PEFCs) have been the system of choice for such applications because of their low operating temperatures (e.g., 60-120° C.), and inherent ability for fast start-ups.
Prior Art FIG. 1 shows a cross-sectional schematic illustration of a polymer electrolyte fuel cell 2. PEFC 2 includes a high surface area anode 4 that acts as a conductor, an anode catalyst 6 (typically platinum), a high surface area cathode 8 that acts as a conductor, a cathode catalyst 10 (typically platinum), and a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) 12 that serves as a solid electrolyte for the cell. The PEM 12 physically separates anode 4 and cathode 8. Fuel in the gas and/or liquid phase (typically hydrogen or an alcohol) is brought over the anode catalyst 6 where it is oxidized to produce protons and electrons in the case of hydrogen fuel, and protons, electrons, and carbon dioxide in the case of an alcohol fuel. The electrons flow through an external circuit 16 to the cathode 8 where air, oxygen, or an aqueous oxidant (e.g., peroxide) is being constantly fed. Protons produced at the anode 4 selectively diffuse through PEM 12 to cathode 8, where oxygen is reduced in the presence of protons and electrons at cathode catalyst 10 to produce water. When either the fuel or the oxidant (or both) is in gaseous form a gas diffusion electrode (GDE) may be used for the corresponding electrode. A GDE, which is available commercially, typically includes a porous conductor (such as carbon), allowing the gas to reach the electrode as well as the catalyst. Often, the catalyst is bound to the PEM, which is in contact with the GDE. Examples of GDEs and fuel cell systems which include GDEs, are describe in U.S. Patent Application Publication 2004/0209154, published 21 Oct. 2004, to Ren et al.
Numerous liquid fuels are available. Notwithstanding, methanol has emerged as being of particular importance for use in fuel cell applications. Prior Art FIG. 2 shows a cross-sectional schematic illustration of a direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC) 18. The electrochemical half reactions for a DMFC are as follows:Anode: CH3OH+H2O→CO2+6H++6e−Cathode: 3/2O2+6H++6e−→3H2OCell Reaction: CH3OH+3/2O2→CO2+2H2O
As shown in FIG. 2, the cell utilizes methanol fuel directly, and does not require a preliminary reformation step. DMFCs are of increasing interest for producing electrical energy in mobile power (low energy) applications. However, at present, several fundamental limitations have impeded the development and commercialization of DMFCs.
One of the major problems associated with conventional DMFCs is that the material used to separate the liquid fuel feed (i.e., methanol) from the gaseous oxidant feed (i.e., oxygen) is typically a stationary polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) of the type developed for use with gaseous hydrogen fuel feeds. These PEMs, in general, are not fully impermeable to methanol or other dissolved fuels. As a result, an undesirable occurrence known as “methanol crossover” takes place, whereby methanol travels from the anode to the cathode catalyst through the membrane where it reacts directly in the presence of oxygen to produce heat, water, carbon dioxide and no useable electric current. In addition to being an inherent waste of fuel, methanol crossover also causes depolarization losses (mixed potential) at the cathode and, in general, leads to decreased cell performance.
A new type of fuel cell, a laminar flow fuel cell (hereinafter “LFFC”) uses the laminar flow properties of liquid streams to limit the mixing or crossover between fuel and oxidant streams and to create a dynamic conducting interface (hereinafter “induced dynamic conducting interface” or “IDCI”), which can in some LFFC designs wholly replaces the stationary PEMs or salt bridges of conventional electrochemical devices. The IDCI can maintain concentration gradients over considerable flow distances and residence times depending on the dissolved species and the dimensions of the flow channel. This type of fuel cell is described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,713,206, issued 30 Mar. 2004 to Markoski et al.
A fuel cell 20 embodying features of this type of flow cell design is shown in Prior Art FIG. 3. In this design, both the fuel input 22 (e.g. an aqueous solution containing MeOH and a proton electrolyte source) and the oxidant input 24 (e.g., a solution containing dissolved oxygen, potassium permanganate or hydrogen peroxide and a proton electrolyte source) are in liquid form. By pumping the two solutions into the microchannel 26, parallel laminar flow induces a dynamic proton conducting interface 28 that is maintained during fluid flow. If the flow rates of the two fluids are kept constant and the electrodes are properly deposited on the bottom and/or top surfaces of the channel, the IDCI is established between anode 30 and cathode 32 and thus completes the electric circuit while keeping the fuel and oxidant streams from touching the wrong electrode. In this particular LFFC design the electrodes are in a side-by-side configuration.
A fuel cell may have a face to face LFFC design. In this design, both the fuel input (e.g. an aqueous solution containing a fuel and a proton electrolyte source) and the oxidant input (e.g., a solution containing dissolved oxygen, potassium permanganate or hydrogen peroxide, and a proton electrolyte source) are in liquid form. By pumping the two solutions into the microchannel, parallel laminar flow induces a dynamic conducting interface that is maintained during fluid flow between the anode and the cathode and thus completes the electric circuit while keeping the flowing fuel and oxidant streams from touching the wrong electrode. If the fuel and oxidant flow rates are the same, the IDCI will be established directly in the middle of the flow channel. The face to face LFFC offers significant operational flexibility as a result of the ability to position the IDCI flexibly between the electrodes without experiencing significant cross-over effects and offers significant performance capabilities due the potential for lower internal cell resistance because of the relatively short and uniform electrode to electrode distances not afforded with the side by side design. Within this face to face design there exist a number of potential flow geometries that could be used. LFFCs with identical cross-sectional areas, but having different channel widths and heights and electrode-electrode distances are possible, however the best choice in design has the lowest electrode to electrode distance and the highest active area to volume ratio. In general a relatively short height and broad width is preferred and will provide the best overall performance under cell operation when positioned orthogonal to the gravitational field. However, if the optimized face to face LFFCs are tilted or jolted the streams can flip or twist causing the fuel and oxidant to come in contact with the wrong electrode, leading to cross-over, catastrophic failure, and/or cell reversal until the stable fluid flow can be re-established. These phenomena severely limit the applicability and usefulness of LFFCs. An improvement is needed to the optimal face to face design that still utilizes all of its performance advantages while stabilizing the fluid flows under all gravitational orientations, and shock-like conditions as well as allowing the streams to be split and recycled.